THEMUFON UFO JOURNALNUMBER 118 SEPTEMBER 1977

Founded 1967 ^^^*" * $1.00

•••••̂ ••IM OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF ftfC/JPOAT/ MUTUAL UFO NETWORK, INC. ••̂ ^̂ •̂H

first seenest o^ 1-2

sln'a. -f-ed Q Y&*. -pm/lr co/our.i / icolourless

jusf before. iouchdi

X^

Unusual UFO at Birdwood, Australia, July 30, 1977

MUFONJOURNAL

103 Oldtowne Rd.Seguin, Texas 78155

RICHARD HALLEditor

WALTER H. ANDRUSDirector of MUFON

PAULCERNYPromotion/publicity .

REV. BARRY DOWNINGReligion and UFOs

ANN DRUFFELCalifornia Report

LUCIUS PARISHBooks/Periodicals/History

MARJOR1E FISHExtraterrestrial Life

MARK HERBSTRITTAstronomy

ROSETTA HOLMESPromotion/Publicity

TED PHILLIPSLanding Trace Cases

DAVID A SCHROTHSt. Louis/Mass Media

JOHN F. SCHUESSLERUFO Propulsion

NORMA E. SHORTDWIGHT CONNELLY

Editor/Publishers Emeritus

LEN STRINGFELDCommentary

The MUFON UFO JOURNAL ispublished by the Mutual UFONetwork, Inc., Sequin, Texas.

. Subscription rates: $8.00 per yearin the U.S.A.; $9.00 per yearforeign. Copyright 1977 by theMutual UFO Network. Secondclass postage paid at Seguin,Texas. Publication identificationnumber , is 002970. Returnundeliverable ' copies to: TheMUFON UFO JOURNAL, 103Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas78155.

FROM THE EDITORAs this is being written,

the early reports are infollowing preview screenings ofthe Columbia Pictures film"Close Encounters of the ThirdKind". Apparently it faithfullyfollows the,general types ofthings that have been reported,and uses them as a basis forphilosophising about theimport of UFO phenomenafor mankind. The closeassociation of Dr. J. AllenHynek and the Center for UFOStudies (CUFOS) with thispotentially blockbuster filmleads us to two predictions for1978: The film will be highlyinfluential in calling attention to

UFOs as a matter of profoundsignificance, and CUFOS willobtain the leverage andsupport to play a stronger rolein guiding future research.This, in turn, probably willaffect .the course of theNational Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA)low-key study now underway.The word is out that NASA hasbeen instructed to reportphenomena back to PresidentJimmy Carter on what sort ofUFO s tudy wou ld beappropriate at this time. Astrong^ reaction to the filmclearly would boost theprospects for a meaningfulNASA UFO project.

In this issue

UNUSUAL UFO AT BIRDWOOD, AUSTRALIA .3By Keith Basterfield

LAUGHING DWARFS OF BEDAIRRIDES ., 4By Jean Bastides

UFO LANDING IN YUGOSLAVIA 6By Milos Krmelj

QUARTERLY REPORT: PHYSICAL TRACES 8By Ted Phillips

STRANGE MARKINGS IN ALBERTA 9By John Musgrave

CALIFORNIA REPORT 10By Ann Druffel

REPORT FROM SWEDEN : • . . . . . ' . : 12By Bertil Soderquist

IN OTHERS' WORDS 13By Lucius Parish

RED LIGHTS & UFOs OVER CANADA 14By John Musgrave

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND 16By Richard Hall

UFO HALTS VAN IN SOUTH AFRICA (News) 17Translated by Cynthia Hind

"SITUATION RED" (Book Review) 18By Dave Dobbs

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE 19By Walt Andrus

RECAPPING AND COMMENTING 20By Richard Hall

ASTRONOMY NOTES 20By Mark Herbstritt

The contents of the MUFON UFO JOURNAL aredetermined by the editor, and do not necessarily

. represent the official position of MUFON. Opinions ofcontributors are their own, and do not necessarily reflectthose of the editor, the staff, or MUFON. Articles may beforwarded directly to MUFON.

Permission is hereby granted to quote from this issueprovided not more than 200 words are quoted from anyone article, the author of the article is given credit, andthe statement "Copyright 1977 by the MUFON UFOJOURNAL, 103 Oldtowne Rd., Seguin, Texas" isincluded.

f PRELIMINARY REPORT ON AN UNUSUAL UFO AT BIRD WOOD

By Keith BasterfieldMUFON Representativefor South Australia

Date: Saturday, 30 July 77Tune: 1540 CST (0610 GMT)Location: Approx 5 km NNW ,ofBirdwood, on the Birdwood toWilliamstown road,:some 32 km NE ofAdelaide, South Australia.Duration: 3% minutes "Reporter: High school scienceteacher. Male. Age 36 years. PhD inorganic chemistry. Name withheld onhis request. Available on file.Account: "I was driving along theBirdwood-Williamstown road about 5km from Birdwood when I noticed anobject in the sky. I thought for amoment that it was an aircraft, but then

I realized that it was not. It wasdescending from an altitude of 1-2 km ata 15-20 ° glide path. As it approachedthe ground its nose lowered and itsettled between a clump of trees and apower pylon about 400 meters from theroad. As I got out of my car a creamcolored 1969 or 1970 Torana stoppedbehind me and the driver got out andshouted, "Did you see that?". I repliedthat I still could and pointed it out tohim. We observed the object for 3minutes and during this time I tookparticular note1 of the position of theobject and other reference points sothat I would be able to estimate its sizeand location. It then raised its tail a littleand slid backwards and upwards a little,then it accelerated .vertically, todisappear in three seconds. I calculatedits vertical velocity to be on the order of6000 kph. At no time did it emit any lightor sound. Its descent and departure did

not seem even to disturb the foliage ofthe trees. Its ascent was also noiseless— not even a supersonic 'bang'."Comments by Reporter:

"I would estimate the average partof it to be 5-9 meters in height, length 50-60 meters, and I would conjecture thatits width would have been in the 20meter mark...Its width being about onethird/of its length."

"There was an object, light pink incolor...a satin finish...I don't think it hadany source of its own." (See sketches).Investigation: UFO Research Inc. ofSouth Australia has interviewed theprime reporter on several occasions,inspected the location with noabnormalities on/to the ground beingnoted, interviewed farmers to bothsides of the location without locatingadditional reporters, and is seeking theidentity of the additional witnesses. Adetailed report is being prepared.

Sketch: Please, sketch the object including shape and, colour of anyfeatures.

~ pi €£,t.S •

•/u/0 Sec&ncts

THE TWO LAUGHING DWARFS OF BEDARRIDES:A CLOSE ENCOUNTER OF THE THIRD KIND

By Jean Bastide

On September 27,1973, at 5:30p.m.,strange events occurred on MountReal, in the French commune ofBedarrides, a small town (close to 3,000population) near the city of Avignon inthe Vaucluse subdivision of southeastFrance. Mount Real is in fact a small hilloverhanging the surroundings, heavilywooded with pine and fir trees and withthick underbrush. Here and there aresmall clearings. It is. a lonely spotcrossed only by small footpaths. At thishour and month, the sun is low and stillvisible. -

On this day, the sky being somewhatcloudy, the visibility good, with no wind,Mr. A (who wishes to remainanonymous) was- searching formushrooms, and had very rapidly filleda whole basket with them. Entering asmall clearing, he noted a big "nest" ofmushrooms and bent down to look atthem. Straightening up, he glimpsed atthe edge of the clearing a small beingabout 4 feet (1.20 meters) tall, whoseemed to grab something on theground. A second similar beingemerged from the brush behind thefirst. They looked like twins, so similarwas their appearance.

Mr. A. took them for children at first,shouting to them that they could collectplenty of mushrooms there. They bothstared at him from a distance of 80-100feet (25-30 meters). Their feet were notvisible, being concealed by the weeds.At this point, both of them seemed tolaugh at the witness, audibly, and theyturned and fled into the underbrushbehind them, bending down beneath anoverhanging branch as they left. Mr. A.thought they had decided to go get abasket to gather mushrooms.

The beings had arms like ours (notlonger proportionally), and they walkedin human fashion, without difficulty.They wore beige colored overalls up tothe neck, with no visible pockets orother openings. They were barerhanded, with human-like hands. Theoveralls covered the arms to the wrists.Their limbs were slender. On theirheads were black berets; ho ears werevisible, but their features.were entirelynormal otherwise. J

Two or three seconds after theirdeparture (perhaps a little longer, theestimation of time by Mr.. A. not beingvery accurate), a large oval object rosefrom behind the brush where the twobeings had disappeared. .It was dullblue-gray, not self-luminous, withoutapertures or visible markings, and wasabout 70 feet (20 meters) away. It wasabout 17 feet (5 meters) long and 7 feet(2 meters) high. The UFO rose slowlyand vertically, making a slight whistle,to a height of about 20 feet (6 meters)carrying up dead leaves from theground. Here it stopped for about asecond, then dashed away horizontallyat a high rate of speed in total silence,directly to Mount Ventoux to thenortheast.

Mr. A. was puzzled by the rapidity ofdeparture immediately after thedisappearance of the two smallcreatures. The trees around the landingsite were about 8 feet (2.5 meters) tall,therefore concealing the landed object.It is noteworthy that, to the witness, thetwo dwarf-like beings had to be Chinese •spies! (He cannot understand that theycould be not of this world, a detail thatlends strong credence to this case). Atthe landing site the grass and a bush

were flattened, and Mr. A. thought theobject must have been hovering a footor two (less than a meter) above theground. (1)

There have been many cases like thisthroughout' the world in the past 30years. Note the striking similarity to the1964 Socorro, N.M. case. (2) Theapparent "laugh" of the beings also hasbeen noted in several cases,particularly in the Cennina, Italy,landing on November 1, 1954 reportedby Sergio Conti in Flying SaucerReview. (3) One of the two beings inthat case "was . the more jovial,laughing..." In a May 1946 landing casenear Angelholm, Sweden, both maleand female occupants were observed.One of the females threw an objectoutside the area of light around theUFO and, says the witness, "I heard herlaugh." (4) My files contain at least sixother cases in which a humanoid wasseen laughing. (5)

References & Notes1. Ouranos, No. 16, 1976, pp. 11-12;Lumieres dans la Nuit, No. 158, Oct.1976, pp. 12-14; Approche, No. 10,June-July 1976, pp. 8-10.2. Socorro Saucer in a PentagonPantry, Ray Stanford (BlueappleBooks, P.O. Box 5694, Austin, Texas78763).3. Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 18, No. 5,pp. 11-15.4. Flying Saucer Review, Vol. 18, No. 2,pp. 15-17.5. For example, the case of Maria EladiaPretzel, Argentina; PhenomenesSpatiaux, No. 17, September, 1968, p.si.

NORTH

AVIGNON 10 KM

;4 FEE!

1.2 M

5 M

2 H

THE TWO DWAHES THE OBJECT

The UFO and "Dwarfs" at Bedarrides

. 5

UFO Landing in YugoslaviaSlavka Gorsek, 26, a health service

cook of Gaberke, near Sostanj,reported to the UFO section of theSOLT Union in Ljubljana an interestingobservation of a UFO with apparentvisible traces of its landing. The sightingtook place at 8:40 PM, February 11,1977, at Gaberke, only about 15 metersaway from the house of the chiefeyewitness. There are also otherwitnesses of this phenomenon: AndrejGorsek, 6, Zoran Gorsek, 4, and theunknown professional driver whohappened to be near the eventuallanding place at that time. We have notcontacted this witness yet, but we haveobtained tape-recorded statementsfrom three other witnesses. We quoteherewith a part of this recording:

UFO section: Can you describe for usyour observation of the unknownphenomenon?Slavka Gorsek: It happened at 8:40PM on February 11, when I decided totake my night's rest. With my twochildren, Andrej and Zoran, I went tothe bedroom. My husband was workingthat evening. We were standing besidemy bed when suddenly an intense whitebeam of light came through thewindow. For a moment it lightened theroom so throughly that it became asbright as broad daylight. It lasted for asecond and the light disappeared.UFO section:What was your reactionthat moment and what do youremember about the object that wasobviously the source of this light?Slavka Gorsek: The light was comingfrom the glowing egg-shaped objectthat landed behind the ken-house,some 15 meters from the house. At thetime of the landing, I did not get aperfectly clear picture of it. My childrenand I, we became very scared by whatwe saw. First I thought of a fire, but laterI began to fear that something wouldexplode any moment. I was afraid ofsome supernatural power because Ihave never had such an experience inmy life.

UFO section: What happened afterthe object had landed and disappearedfrom your field of vision?Slavka Gorsek: Nothing at allhappened in the next two minutes.There was no light to be seen anymore.The.object had probably extinguished.There was no sound to be heardcoming from the object either. And,then the object flashed up again. Itmade a vertical take-off and flew away.This time I made a closer observation ofits take-off because I anticipated it. But Imust point out that the three of us, wewere very frightened all that time andeven long after the event.UFO section: Describe for us theshape, size and color of the object as itwas taking off.Slavka Gorsek: First let me tell youthat the object probably emitted thesame quantity of light when taking off asit had done when landing. The objectwas egg-shaped, 2.5-3.5 meters wide(about 8 to 11 feet). A luminous whiteglow was coming from its outer edge.Then came a very bright bluish coloredstripe, encircling the exact centerwhich was dominated by a field of bluecolor. On this area I spotted three moreor less circular bright spots, of similarshape, more or less regularly spaced.The whole object was emitting anintense glow, but the outlines of theobject were nevertheless sharp.(Author's Note: Andrej and ZoranGorsek gave similar descriptions of thisphenomenon; they only disagreed thatthe object's center was blue-colored: intheir opinion, the color was rathergreenish).UFO section: What happened afterthe object took off? • •Slavka Gorsek:The objectdisappeared and we did not see itanymore. We were so scared that wecould not fall asleep. We went to theliving room to watch TV and wait for myhusband to return from work. I did notleave the house that evening to have alook at the landing spotrand possiblysee the landing traces, because I did not

By Milos Krmelj

think of them at all. Accidentally,' Ispotted the traces only the third'evening after this event, when I noticeda glimmering dust at the landing site.

The members of the UFO section,together with an APRO representativein Yugoslavia (who is founder of thissection at SOLT Union) made a carefulinvestigation of the landing site and itstraces. We obtained the followingadditional technical data:

The object was from 2.85 to 3.85meters long. The greatest distancebetween the legs of the object was 2.85meters, but we allow a tolerance thatthe legs were shifted for nearly 50centimeters inwards. The object waselliptical, its section being like that of aright ellipse, the diameters being in theproportion of 2 to 1. When the objectwas performing a vertical take-off, itwas in the field of vision of the eye-witness. The object moved in a steadymotion, without any acceleration. Withthe assistance of the time estimationand distance, we calculated, theobject's rate of speed to be between 2.5and 3.5 meters per second during take-off.

The object landed on a groundinclined at an angle of 22° toward theeastern part of the property. Thelanding spot was a small field, and theslope is overgrown with grass. Theilluminating power of the object wasconstant' and its shape and colorunderwent no changes whatsoever. Nosound was heard coming from theobject.

Material traces.of the landingAfter the event, the eyewitness

marked the landing traces of the legs byplacing sticks into those spots. Theobject had five landing legs. The legsformed a pentagon, the straight lines ofwhich were on an average 2.4 meterslong. Each leg was composed of threetube-shaped segments. The thicknessof these "tubes" was one millimeter and

the "tube's" diameter was 5.4centimeters. The segments formed atriangle, the straight side of which was

,..13.7 cm long; but this was true for thefour legs only, while at the fifth leg, the

.. three "tubes" were closer attached to. each other.

The traces of these "tubular"segments are all seen on thephotographs. Unfortunately, thesetraces have been partially wiped out sothat it is rather difficult to notice thetraces of all the three segments on thephotograph at the same time. Theadditional photographs were snappedat the time plaster casts of one of the 15segments were made.

The glimmering dust left by theUFO

In the conversation, theeyewitness also mentioned that shenoticed a silvery glimmering dust at thelanding site. Her opinion is that it wasleft by the UFO. This dust she spottedat night when she tried to illuminate thelanding site with her pocket-lamp. Thedust was more intensely sprinkled onthose spots that indicated the traces ofthe landing legs. When investigating thelanding site we obtained specimens ofthis dust and submitted them toanalysis at the most competent Sloveneresearch institution.

The soil specimens also were given abiological growth test. We testedmonocotyledonous plants as well asdicotyledonous ones using soil takenfrom the spot indicated by the holesmade by the legs, and from locationsnear the landing site. The resultsproved to be negative at first, but latersome changes in growth were observedas seen in one of the photographs. Thisis hot conclusive. The chemicalcomposition of the soil did not undergogreater changes that could affect thegrowth of monocotyledonous plants(corn) or dicotyledonous plants(beans). Even if these plants had actedlike there were some changes inchemical composition, it must beremembered that only one experimentwas made, not fifty, which it might taketo prove some influence of "UFO

polluted" soil on the plants' growth.We have also made a simple test

for detecting radioactivity at the landingspot. The results were again negative,but we cannot say whether the groundabsorbed a lesser quantity of it becauseour test was not sensitive enough todetect it. It is also possible that thetraces were radioactive only for ashorter period of time (a few hours) orthat radioactivity did not exist at all.

Inaccuracies:We happened to be in the middle of

our investigation, when we were verysurprised upon reading the article onthe back page of the provincial weekly"Novi Tednik", dated April 21, 1977.The article introduces this case to theinhabitants of the Stajerska region. Wediscovered at once the followingmisinterpretation? or inaccuracies:1. The writer says that the object hadsix legs. We established that there wereonly five traces, hence there wereonly five legs. It is not clear to us wherethe writer came up with the sixth one.2. The scales were not bronze colored(moreover, they were not "scales" butdust), but they were glittering silvery.3. The object never proved to be 6.5meters long, 3 meters high and about 3meters wide. In reality all theseextensions were much lesser, as wehave already stated in our report.4. The description of the object's coloralso disagrees with the fact because the

The Landing Siteobject did not :glow reddish.5. We, "the special commission fromLjubljana", as the writer of this articlecalled us, did not issue a statement thatthe soil was harmless for growingplants, because from time to time wewill have to visit the spot and follow.upon the growth of the plants. (Already inthe beginning of July, 1977, we againvisited the landing site and found thegrass growing normally.)

What were the results of the soilanalysis?

When we got hold of the soilspecimens, we asked for help from theexperts at the Jozef Stefan Institute inLjubljana. They kindly put thespecimens to an analysis. With thepermission of the Institute, we quotethe results of analysis:

Specimen in the smaller glassbottle (little sheets).Basis: Fe (iron), Mg (magnesium), Si(silicon).Admixtures: Ca (calcium), Al(aluminum), Mn (manganese).Traces of chemical elements: Al, Na(sodium), Cu (copper).

Specimen in the bigger glassbottle (soil with glittering particles).Basis: Fe, Al, Mg, Si, Ti, Ca.Admixtures: Mn, Na.Traces of chemical elements: Cu,Gallium (Ga).

(Continued on page 8)

QUARTERLY REPORT - PHYSICAL TRACE CASES ~ 1977

By Ted Phillips Radiation

Currently the trace catalog (TRACAT)contains 1,033 cases.

During the period January 1, 1977 -April 1, 1977, I have entered two newcases.# 1 , 0 2 5 U N I T E D STATES,Wisconsin. Month of March, no date orlocation. Burnt area and imprintsfound, no direct sighting, observationsin the area reported. (From a telephoneconversation with Ron Westrum)

#1,024 U N I T E D STATES,Gatchellville, Pennsylvania. March 8,1977, 1930. Eleven (11) witnesses atvarious locations reported seeing a"red ball of fire" moving very slowly atvery low level. Duration of sighting was25 minutes. A ground fire was reportedand an area 30 x 100 ft. was found burnt.In this burnt area, a triangular sectionwas not burnt. The area measured 72"x 54" x 52"; a hole was found at eachpoint of the triangle. (Report from JohnLutz to CUFOS)

Fluid • 20% Footprints • 18%

TYPES OF TRACES (1964-1976)

(Continued from page 7)

A small piece of dross in the soilBasis: Fe, Mg, Si.

Admixtures: Cu, Mo (molybdenum),Cr (chromium), Ni (nickel), Ga.Traces of chemical elements: Al, Mn,Ca.

Commentary of the UFO section ofthe Solt Union

The case deserved enoughattention so that we devoted to it a lot oftime as well as considerable means forits investigation. Most probably it is ouronly UFO case that has left us withmaterial traces that our UFO sectiontook note of and more or less quicklyinvestigated. Our opinion is that it is nota matter of fraud with which theeyewitness would have made fun of oursection. Still we somehow feelfrustrated about this case because wecannot prove its authenticity with the liedetector or even with regressivehypnosis which might bring us morereliable results. But in any case, we donot see any reason or motive for fraudsince we are experienced in detectingthe authenticity of UFO sightings.

The phenomenon itself is far frombeing a unique one. From other similarobservants it differs mainly in the fact

Plants Grown in Soilfrom Landing Site

that the object had a peculiar number oflegs for landing, and in the shape of theimprints these legs made in the ground.Another peculiarity appears to be theglittering particles of dust. Although weexpected much from the analysis of thisdust, it proved to be a common mica:A very interesting feature also is the"dross" which was not found by us, butby the investigators at the Jozef StefanInstitute. Since standard drossescontain a lot of calcium, this specimenof it was quite different from others inthat it contained only the smallestquantity of it. Yet the chemicalcomposition of this dross was more orless a normal one. We cannot be surehow this dross came to the spot:perhaps it already was there before thelanding or perhaps it resulted from the

presence of the UFO and its stillunknown influences upon the groundwhere it landed.

:In any ,case, we investigated a veryunusual phenomenon, or better anaircraft the origin and purposes ofwhich we do not know.

Additional information: Only a fewkilometers from the landing site areseveral thermocentrals, which are themost powerful objects for electricalproduction in this part of the country.and also Slovenija. Only a few metersfrom the landing site are . normalelectrical wires. During my second visitin early July, 1977, I learned, aftertalking with almost all neighbors, thatthe main eyewitness is reliable and nota publicity seeker or liar. I must say thatthe case sounds very authentic to me. Ialso got some new sighting reportsdating back to Autumn 1976 and thelatest from May, 1977. Those cases arenot so spectacular as the landing itself,but they will be investigated further.

Finally, I must thank the followingmembers of our small group for theirsupport in our investigation: MarkoBreskvar, Franci Bricelj, Damir Cicek,and Branko Kristan.

8

STRANGE MARKINGS IN ALBERTABy John Brent Musgrave(MUFON Provincial Directorfor Alberta, Canada)

Ted Phillip's trace catalogue waspublished in July, 1975 by the Centerfor UFO Studies. When taken in properperspective, it is a useful source bookfor understanding some kinds of UFOevents. But it has to be kept in mind thatit is a source book of possible UFO

! events, not a listing of verified UFOI events. The Canadian entries, like

those of other countries, varyI considerably in their reliability and

usefulness. Some are classic cases, andhave been well documented; others aremost likely spurious. Unfortunately,many of the entries are in fact no morethan unusual burnt areas, or strangemarkings, for which no everydayexplanation could be offered. Amechanical interpretation would haveexcluded at least a third of theCanadian entries from a catalogue ofphysical traces actually associated witha UFO sighting-where the associationis more than just potential coincidence.Too often physical traces are presumedto have been "caused" by a UFOmerely because someone, sometime(be it hours, days, weeks, or evenmonths, before the physical tracediscovery), somewhere "nearby" sawsomething in the sky. On the otherhand, the inclusion of these kinds of

f cases can be justified on the theory thatif at least some UFO events occurwithout witnesses (and a great deal ofUFO speculation is predicated on thisassumption without really consideringwhat this means and in what kinds ofcases it probably is not true), thensome, if not most, unusual markings arein fact generated by UFOs-whateverUFOs may ultimately turn out to be. Itis in this spirit that the following reportis presented.

The latest strange markings inAlberta were discovered on June 21st,approximately four miles southeast of

Lanaria, Alberta (54°13' N., 114°03' W.)as a farmer sprayed his recently plantedbarley field. Approximately 150 yardsfrom the nearest road, he came uponthree dug up trenches in a Y-shapepattern. The three 'legs" or trenchesradiate from a central point, and alldip below the surface at about a 5°slope-so that they become tunnels atthe ends. Each leg is about 2-4 inches indiameter, varying unevenly in size alongits length. Each leg- curves slightly,rather than being absolutely straight,and each leg is the same length-approximately 56 inches from thecenter to the end. From above, the baseof the Y is pointed 5° south of east, andthe arms of the Y are at a 90°angle toeach other. The soil around each legwas h o n e y c o m b e d . A holeapproximately four inches in diameterand 18 inches deep is located just to thenortheast of center.

When I visited the site a week and ahalf after its discovery, the barley plantsclose to the site were yellowed andbrown. Some had speculated that thiswas caused by the heat of whatever hadbeen there. But the plants were notyellowed when first discovered on the21st, and likely had been uprooted by

the event or subsequent sightseers. Bythe time I visited the site, it showed thenormal effects of being a local point ofinterest even though a tarp had beenplaced over it for protection. As soon asit was discovered, the local RoyalCanadian Mounted Police were notifiedand they inspected the site. Theyinformed the owner that "they wouldnotify someone at the university". Amonth after the event, someone fromacademia has yet to show up.

No one in the area can conceivewhat caused the markings. They aredifferent from anything seen before,and to the knowledge of the localresidents no survey crews or anythinglike that have been in the area. The siteis not remote, but it is out of the way.Any vehicle would have left tracks,as there had been frequent rains beforethe discovery. On Saturday, the 18th ofJune-three days before the markingswere discovered-"a shiny object" wasobserved in the field at about thatlocation by someone driving by on thenearby roadway, but he paid it noattention. Other than this possibleconnection, there have been no UFOsightings in the area in recent months.

Photo taken facing west; the ruler is 1 foot long.

CALIFORNIA REPORTBy Ann Druffel

NOTE: This month's contribution is by Ron Scott,Ph.D.; a'solid-state physicist presently working m radar'research. He receiued his degree from the University ofCalifornia, Irvine and has been interested in UFOs forthe past sixteen years. He is 'particularly interested inphysical effects cases. Dr. Scott lives in SouthPasadena, California.

SYNTHETIC ABDUCTION:A NEW TOOL FOR UFOLOGY

There has appeared recently a mostprovocative and, I believe, a mostimportant piece of experimentalresearch into the nature of the UFOabduction experience. This is the workof William C. McCall, Alvin H. Lawson,and John DeHerrera who have studiedthe induction of purely imaginary UFOexperiences in experimental subjects,by. means of hypnosis. •

The results of these experiments areprovocative because they challenge thecommonly held interpretations of theabductee accounts and will be taken bymany as a direct challenge to thecredibility of some well known casessuch as that of Betty and Barney Hill.These studies are important becausethey bring into focus what I believe maybe two conflicting components of theufological data: the participatoryabduction narrative and the report inwhich, a description of physical effectsforms the primary content.

My purpose here is to expand uponthis latter concept in view of these newexperiments. This note, then,constitutes a reply -to the paperpresented by Professor Lawson to the1977 MUFON Symposium, and whichappears in the proceedings of thatmeeting, (i)

These experiments provide a set ofresults which should be dealt with.Discriminating students of the subjectcertainly cannot proceed until, to theirsatisfaction, these findings have beenrationalized within the framework ofcurrent thought.

In the Fall of 1976 Dr. Alvin Lawson,Professor of English, at the CaliforniaState University, Long Beach, Dr.William McCall, a physician and Mr.John DeHerrera, a UFO researcher10

associated with APRO, came togetherto study some alleged UFO abductions.These cases, which were originallyidentified by Mr. DeHerrera, proved tobe unsatisfactory to the researchers ona number of accounts. In a recentconversation, Dr. McCall related thathe and his co-workers were struck bythe singularly shallow character of theabduction narratives obtained throughhypnotic regression. Having employedhypnosis in his practice for nearly 20years, Dr. McCall, a recognizedauthority in clinical hypnosis, sensedthat the performance of the UFOabductee, as a reporter underhypnosis, suffered in some substantialrespect by comparison with patientsusually encountered in a clinicalcontext.

Induced AbductionsThe investigators decided that in

order to gain some perspective on theabduction experience, it would beuseful to plan and carry out hypnoticsessions with naive (of the UFOliterature) subjects and, by hypnoticsuggestion, place the subjects in anabduction scenario. The descriptivenarrative then produced would beentirely the product of the subject'simagination and it was hoped thatrevealing comparisons with the "real"abductees could be drawn.

Al toge ther , eight imaginaryabductees have been studied. (2) Thesewere persons carefully screened as totheir unfamiliarity with the UFOliterature and the absence of previoussightings. The hypnotic sessions wereconducted in a hospital in Anaheim,California, by Dr. McCall. Prof. Lawsonand Mr. DeHerrera were present. A

rigid protocol was employed in whichthe hypnotist would suggest to thesubject that he was in, each of asuccession of situations characteristicof a typical UFO abduction. At eachstage the subject was asked to describewhat. he saw, his surroundings, theoccupants, etc. Aside from initialsuggestions to relax the subject, thesequence was as follows:

A. Loss of controlB. Witness senses UFOC. Witness senses being taken

- aboard UFOD. Witness senses UFO interior

; E. Witness senses UFO entitiesF. Witness senses being

"examined"G. Witness senses being given a

"message". H. Witness senses being returned

to normal physical/mentalenvironment

For example, once the trance wasestablished, Dr. McCall would suggestthat the subject would 'look up andsee" an unidentified flying object. Thesubject was then simply asked todescribe what he saw. The subject'sown imagination invariably suppliedsurprising detail. Again, in phase B,"you are now inside that UFO, describethe interior". In this manner animaginary UFO abduction experiencewas synthesized. It must beemphasized that no more suggestionthan that required to "set the stage" wasgiven and invariably the subject's ownimagination produced a wealth ofdetailed description, much to thesurprise of the investigators.

What then were the results of the

experiments? The raw data of theseexperiments are the tape 'recordings ofthe subject's description of his imaginedUFO experience. From these tapes,transcripts were prepared by Prof.Lawson who then attempted acomparative analysis between theimaginary and the "real" abductee'snarratives. Through a painstaking, lineby line reduction of the transcripts,Prof. Lawson has tabulated andcategorized those "bits" of imaginaryinvention which form the palpablecontent of these narratives. Similaranalyses were carried out ontranscripts of "real" abducteeregressions and a rudimentarystatistical comparison was made. Uponexamining the tabulations one isimmediately impressed by the parallelswhich exist between imaginaryabductees, "real" abductees and theliterature in general.

I believe that the simplest inferencewhich the data support may besummarized in the following statement:

Experimental subjects,operating solely on imagination,produce narratives whichclosely parallel, in detail, thosenarratives obtained by thehypnotic regression of allegedlyreal UFO abductees.

This has been only a brief sketch ofthe experimental procedure and thereader is strongly urged to examineProf. Lawson's papers where his owninterpretations, and many facets of thestudy hot mentioned here, are treatedin detail.

I have not yet encountered anycriticisms of the work which would altermy views regarding the basic inferencenoted above. In the limited exposurethat Prof: Lawson's analysis has had sofar, I have heard a number of responseswhich are surprising. The mostsurprising, due to it's irrelevant nature,is the statement, "yes, but they askedleading questions....". This is preciselythe point of the study, to attempt torecreate an abduction narrative asobtained through regression, by a UFOinvestigator. One can draw upon thetranscripts of any regression of an

allegedly real abductee and find thequestions are leading; more so in mostcases than those in Dr. McCall'sprotocol.

As Professor Lawson points out inhis talks and articles, there aredifferences between the "real" andi m a g i n a r y abduc tees . Thesedifferences include the absence ofemotional involvement in the imaginarycases as well as the absence of anemotional aftermath. It is hot clear atthis point whether these differences aresignificant to the major findings of thestudy or to its potential utility. Forexample, one might ask: what is thedifference in principle between afabrication, born of an emotionaldisturbance, and an event imagined atthe suggestion of a hypnotist to apreviously uninvolved subject? It seemsconsistent that the differences wouldinclude those noted.

What Does it Mean?We come now to the sticky part.

What can it all mean? One implication isclear enough; that information obtainedthrough hypnotic regression ofabductees may be highly unreliable. I donot mean to imply that no abductionshave occurred, but only that the weightof the new evidence requires that wequestion the credibility of the UFOabduction as a real experience.-Professor Lawson recognizes this onlytoo well. He writes:

"This study has provided evidencethat imaginary subjects under hypnosisreport UFO experiences which seemidentical to those of 'real' witnesses.However, my assumption - and it is amajor one - is that abductions are 'real'in some sense to the witness, and so thecentral question.:, is this: what is thenature of the stimulus which triggers inwitnesses the sequence of events whichthey describe as an abductionexperience? We cannot answer thisquestion, and it may be simplistic toadopt either a 'nuts-and-bolts' or'psychic' hypothesis."

This is a meaty paragraph. I think,however, that Professor Lawson mayhave overlooked a potentially deeper

implication for ufology which lies in hisown work. The nature of the stimuluswhich triggers the sequence of eventswhich the witness describes as anabduction, is certainly an importantquestion, but only half of the question.The central question, I believe, isinstead: what is the nature of thedichotomy which exists in the body ofufological data and which forces us toconsider the possibility of a "nuts-and-bolts" or a "psychic" hypothesis, in thefirst place? Indeed, Professor Lawsonrecognizes that his own work, taken atface value, conflicts with that body ofdata in which physical effects arereported. He writes:

"Because the research indicates thatthe imagination of individual witnessesmay be the source of much if not all thedata we have about alleged abductions,I feel that these experiments representa significant challenge to the 'nuts-and-bolts' interpretation of the UFOmystery. But the obvious problem withany non-physical hypothesis is that itfalls short of explaining physical'evidence'..."

Professor Lawson goes on to suggestthe possibility of an "unconscious-psychokinetic link", i.e., the physicaleffects noted so often in the literature(disturbed soil, photographs, radarreturns and the like) are the products ofthe minds of human beings. This is tidyin that it completely internalizes theentire UFO phenomenon into thepsyche of man. .

. Intellectually, I must recoil at thispoint and for a number of reasons.Firstly, objective examination of theexisting literature on paranormalresearch and its history reveals nothingin the way of a paranormal facility whichsurvives the process of independentreplication. This is a fact which must bekept separate from one's ownpredilections on the matter .Furthermore, the history of the subjectis littered with the remains of studieslater shown to be faked. This is not tosay that paranormal processes do hotexist, but only that existing data are farfrom convincing. Thus it is certainlypremature to adopt (or even speculate

(Continued on page 12) 11

(Continued from page 11)about) paranormal sources for thephysical effects so often found in the"non-participatory" UFO report.

It is much healthier, I think to adoptthe point of view that it is the conflictbetween these two components of theufological data which should be theappropriate focus of attention - "thecentral question" - in UFO research.This is the message contained in theexperiments of McCall, Lawson andDeHerrera.

The abductee, and this is only avisceral feeling I voice here, representssomething which may in some subtlebut significant way, differ from thephenomenon associated with thereport of a physical effects sighting or ofa CE-1 or CE-II. What is this difference?I don't known, but the hints are there.For example, if we exclude the so-calledcontactees, the abductee is a late-comer in modern UFO chronicles. Wehave, since 1947, actually witnessed theemergence of the abduction case, itsrefinement and finally its cautiousacceptance. There are other hints, too.Lawson even touches upon thisdifference when he asks, "Why aren'tthere more interrupted abductions?"

"Of the hundred-odd UFOabductions reported, none has been ahalf-way affair. Each has a wholeness orintegral quality... which differs fromother close encounters. Manywitnesses have reported, for instance,that a CE-I or a CE-H was in progresswhen an approaching vehicle or otherinterruption apparently caused theUFO to leave... but no partialabductions have been reported and Ithink this is very curious."

Significant areas of future research,one should think, lie in identifying thefurther differences between allegedUFO abductions, physical effectsreports and other close encounters.

Implications for UFO research are inthe areas of methodology andphilosophical orientat ion. Onepotentially useful device might be a newdivision of labor in ufology. By analogywith the field of anthropology, wherethe subject is divided into physical12

Report from SwedenBy

Bertil Soderquist,MUFON Representative

anthropology and cultural anthro-pology, we might do well to organizeour work into areas which could belabelled physical ufology andpsychognostic ufology. The physicalufologist would deal with the collectionand analysis of all non-participatoryUFO reports, i.e., everything from NLthrough CE-III where no abduction orinteraction with occupants is reported.The physical ufologist would attempt toestablish the physical reality of thestimulus of these reports. Thepsychognostic ufologist, on the otherhand, would deal with the participatoryUFO report and attempt to establish,perhaps through experiments like theones discussed here, the degree towhich the UFO experience is aninternal process, independent ofphysical reality. .The unifying theme insuch a scheme is of course to identify asmany internal inconsistencies aspossible in the-data base and therebyexpose new lines of research.

Unfortunately, despite 30 years ofeffort by dedicated people, littleadvance has been made inunderstanding the stimulus. But,perhaps we have here, in theseexperiments, a lead. It is important tobear in mind that we are dealing withwhat is certainly a human experience,but which carries only a suggestion ofphysical reality.

REFERENCES1. "What Can We Learn From Hypnosis ofImaginary Abductees?" Alvin H. Lawson, 1977MUFON UFO Symposium Proceedings, July,1977.2. The reader is referred to a forthcoming articleby Alvin H. Lawson which is scheduled to appearin the proceedings of the Fate sponsored UFOConference marking the thirtieth anniversary ofKenneth Arnold's sighting, held June 24-26,1977.

(Editor's Note: Prof. Soderquistreports that between October 2 andDecember 5, 1976, at least 28 UFO-related observations were reported toUFO Information Sweden. Two of themore unusual and interesting cases aresummarized here.)

Junosuando, northern Sweden;November 16, 1976, 7:30 P.M.-OlleRostmark, 35, was driving along acountry logging road south ofTornefors when he collided with abrilliantly lit sphere about 1.5 meters indiameter. The car started to vibrate,and he felt a burning pain (he describedit as a sensation as if he were being cutin two pieces). The whole incident tookabout 30 seconds. No damage could beseen on the car afterwards. Olle feltparalyzed, and the next day he foundhis vision to be impaired. Uponexamining him, a physician suggestedthat he might have had a case ofsnow-blindness. The Esrange rocketresearch station informs us that aRussian research team has beenlaunching giant balloons from the basedaily since November 10. Theseballoons have a diameter of 50 meters,and have been known to be carried bythe winds as far as the Ural Mountains.However, I don't think it likely thatballoons are the explanation in thiscase.

Kolsva , cen t ra l Sweden;November 14, 1976, 4:15 P.M.-About10 people observed a large UFO aboutone kilometer north of the community.At the same time, similar observationswere made on the Isle of Aland(between Sweden and Finland), andnear the town of Abo in Finland. Twowitnesses, a man and a woman, gavethe following description: "The UFOhovered above the tree-tops. Itresembled a tropical helmet, had adiameter of about six meters, and wasshining like silver. A yellowish-red lightcame from the lower portion, and aplume of smoke rose from the upperportion. No windows could be seen.

Captain Gustavo Fcrreira, a seniorpilot for the Colombian airline, Avianca,told of his three UFO sightings in theAugust 23 issue of National Enquirer.On two of the occasions, the UFOswere also tracked by radar.

The August 16 issue of The Starreported on UFO sightings and alanding case from Fawn Grove,Pennsylvania. In the August 30 issue,

(Sweden, continued)The UFO disappeared from sight, but asimilar object was seen shortlyafterwards hovering above the powerplant. This lat ter UFO wassubsequently studied for about an houras it moved upwards, downwards, andmade turns. Three times it beamed lightrays towards a wooded area below it.Then a smaller UFO appeared. It roseslowly for 20 minutes, positioning itselftemporarily beneath the larger UFO-Then it disappeared quickly (out ofsight in about 30, seconds). It wasdescribed as elongated, resembling asausage. The central portion was white,and the ends were orange, blue, andred. The larger UFO remained in sightfor another half-hour."

At the same time, 4:15 P.M., twoother persons were approachingKolsva from the north and saw a UFOwhich they described as being as largeas a full moon. A farmer about 10kilometers away also saw it, as did anumber, -of other witnesses fromdifferent viewing positions. The localAir Force station has no explanation ofthe - observation. About .4 P.M., twopeople on the Isje of Aland, about 250km. east-northeast of Kolsva, observeda large white light proceeding with greatspeed in a northwesterly direction. TheUFO resembled a teaspoon in shape.The observation lasted one-half hour,during which the UFO changed altitudeseveral times. About the same time, inthe vicinity of Abo, Finland, 120 km.further to the east-northeast, twopeople observed a UFO with a long,brilliant tail of light towards the west.They later saw the UFO disappeartowards Aland.

Lucius Farrish

In Others'WordsTed Ph i l l i p s summar izes hisinvestigations of lending sites, as well ascommenting on UFO activity ingeneral. Adrian Vance's theory ofUFOs as time machines is featured inthe September 6 issue. Vance's book,UFOs, The Eye and The Camera, is setfor release by Barlenmir House onOctober 31 ($8.95).

The No. 7 issue of True FlyingSaucers and UFOs has recently beenreleased. Aside from an article byWendelle Stevens (whose articles arealways well worth reading), this issuecontains little of interest.

Rumor has it that Argosy UFO hasswitched to a bi-annual publishingschedule. At any rate, the Argosy UFOAnnual is now available. It contains'material, of varying quality, includingarticles by Robert Barrow, GeorgeFriedrich, Hayden Hewes and others.

Jerome .Clark's article on theAcapulco UFO Conference in theSeptember issue of Fate providessome interesting details of that semi-disastrous gathering.

The October issue of UFO Reporthas a varied offering of topics. B. AnnSlate's article is perhaps the best of thelot, providing some very thought-provoking speculations on a UFOBigfoot connection.

The trend towards sensationalismand fiction is evident in the Octoberissue of Official UFO. This issue has afew redeeming features, in the form ofGeorge Barley's book review column[since cancelled. - Ed], article byDorothy Aldridge, etc., but it is evidentthat these are holdovers from DennisHauck's tenure as editor. As .1mentioned in a previous column, theera of responsible journalism is over,insofar as Official UFO is concerned.

And if you think Official UFO isbad, wait until you see the Novemberissue of Ancient Astronauts! The lesssaid about it, the better. Save yourmoney!

D. Scott Rogo's The HauntedUniverse is another attempt to explainUFOs (and other types of anomalousphenomena) .in terms of psychicmanifestations. Of course, Rogo doestalk of UFOs and "monsters" being"physical realities," but he thinks thathumans are creating even more ofthese enigmas in their minds. Says he,"For every UFO that flits through thesky, many more are created by thepsyche". Now what about those "real"UFOs? What are they? Rogo doesn'tlike the idea of extraterrestrial vehiclesbecause, he says, "no one has ever

.downed one, shot off a part of one, orcaptured -one on the ground".Personally, I wouldn't make any bets oneither of those possibilities.

If the idea of UFO events aspersonal "psycho-dramas" interestsyou, you might very well like the Rogobook. However, I prefer that writersdisplay a great deal more familiaritywith their subjects, not to mentiondouble-checking their data to eliminateobvious boo-boos. As a writer onparapsychology,, Rogo may be able tohold his own with the best of them, butwhen it comes to UFOs and Forteana,he still has a lot to learn. The HauntedUniverse is available from NewAmerican Library - P.O. Box 999 -Bergenfield, NJ 07621; $1.50,. plus 35<ffor postage and handling.

It is now rumored that J. AllenHynek's forthcoming Dell paperback(perhaps to be titled The Hynek UFOReport) will be released in December.Updates will be presented when/if theybecome available.

Something to look for in mid-1978(or thereabouts) is The UFOEncyclopedia from Doubleday & Co.The compiler is Ronald Story, author ofThe Space-Gods Revealed.Contributions by various UFOresearchers will be included in theEncyc/opedia, which will sell for around$25.00.

13

Red Lights & Other UFOs Over Canada

By John Brent Musgrave(MUFON Provincial Director for Alberta,Canada)

Most of the Canadian sightingspublished since the first of this year arenot in themselves extraordinary. Theyconsist in the main of lights in the sky -either individual lights, or lights information. On the other hand, therehas been at least one account of a"possible abduction" near PrinceGeorge, B.C. (1) on the 5th of January,as well as a combined physical traceand occupant report from Montreal,P.Q. the very next day. (2) But themajority of cases are only lights in thesky. Venus and Jupiter were bothbrilliant earlier in the year, and at leastthe majority of sightings in one "UFOmini-flap" — that at Slave Lake, Alberta— were caused by misidentifications ofthese two planets. (3) The Slave Lakesightings received national coverage-inpart due to the promotional activity ofMajor Wayne Aho, a contactee whovisited the area as part of a toiir throughthis part of Canada. (4)

There appears to have been apattern to at least some of the lights inthe sky reports, and they may tie-in withsome of the closer Canadian sightings.A significant number of sightingsinvolve one or more bright red lights —some flashing or pulsating, otherssteady in brightness. Among thepublished reports are the following.

Early in January three OntarioProvincial Police officers of theNapanee detachment observed abrightly-lit UFO hovering over theLennox hydro generating station atabout 2:30 A.M. A large bright red lightis reported to have "swooped down

low" over the village, and then streakedupward. (5) Later in the month, on the21st, at 8:30 P.M. a "flashing red light"was seen over West Peters, P.E.I. byfour RCMP constables, as well as manyof the townsfolk. (6) Another flashingred light was observed at Saint-Barthelemy, P.Q. on February 17th at9:15 P.M. (7) On the 3rd of March justafter 9 P.M. a flashing red light wasobserved at Hawkesbury, Ontario, by amember of the Ontario ProvincialPolice and two youths. (8) The flasherhas been seen on cither nights overHawkesbury as well, including the nightof May 29th — again, just after 9 P.M.(9)

On the 15th of April at 9:20 P.M.,several lights were seen in a triangularformation over Beloeil, P.Q.; the reportdoes not specify the color of the lights inthe formation. (10) However, the sameevening, around 10 P.M. at least Slightswere observed over London, Ontario— four of which were reported to havebeen in an arrow-shaped formation.The lights were also witnessed by atleast one pilot, Bruce Powell. Heobserved them from his twin enginePiper Aztec at about 10:30 P.M., afterhearing about them over the radio whilehe was up in the air. He told a radiointerviewer that he wasn't able to get areally good look at them, but that theywere flashing red lights — possiblymore than one red light on each UFO,and they could have had a conicalcylinder shape. He chased them forabout half an hour before returning andlanding. (11)

One of the most interestingCanadian close encounter reports sofar this year comes from Victoria, B.C.Around 9 P.M. on March 9th, twoteenage sisters, Maria and SusannaStratford, saw a shiny oval objectdescend almost to tree-top level. It hada flashing red light on top, a bulge on thebottom, and made a low hummingnoise. The two sisters said the UFOcircled 30 feet above them, and theycould see the reflection of street lightson its surface before it took off. (12)

Closer to home, Edmonton,Alberta, has had its share of steady andflashing red lights as well, though noneof the sightings have been closeencounters with structural detail. Onthe llth of March, several members ofthe Edmonton UFO Society in differentparts of the city observed a brilliant redflashing light from just before 11 P.M.until around 11:30. There was a cloudceiling of 12,000 feet; yet whenobserved through binoculars and atelescope, the light could not beresolved. Red flashing lights were alsoobserved over Edmonton in April.Hundreds of people from various partsof the city observed two red flashinglights close together — again between11 and 11:30 P.M. The lights were closetogether, and gave the impression ofbeing part of the same object. Onewitness, Charles R. Elliott, circulationmanager for Edmonton Reportmagazine, described it as "exactly likethe light from a C-47 Puff-The-MagicDragon gunship." That is, it appearedto be two V-shaped tongues of red fire,

14

moving slowly westward. (13) Thishappened on the 23rd of April. Becauseof the publicity given these sightings,one witness, who wishes to remainanonymous, came forth with two colorphotographs he took through a 200mmlens (Canon). While observing the twolights, he got the impression 'that therewas a structure between them; but thisdoesn't show up in the photographs.They were taken at about %-secondwith Kodak 64ASA slide film. The blackand white reproductions do show thechange in brightness as the two lightscontinually flashed. The photographermoved while, taking the secondphotograph, and the two trails show thecomparative change in brightnessduring this time interval.

Sometime during the spring (exactdate not remembered by the witness) adisc-shaped red object was observed bya woman as she was driving home earlyin the evening. She was driving south,and the object was to the west of hercar, also travelling south. It appeared tobe just above the power lines, and waslarger than the moon in apparent size. Itwas elliptical or oval shaped, and wastilted downward at about a 45° angle.She observed it for perhaps a minute ormore before going inside her house toget more witnesses. When they cameoutside they could see a red light low inthe south which soon disappeared.

On the 7th of April, a number ofschool children were playing in a southside school yard about 8:45 P.M. Theysaw an oval shaped object which hadred lights on the top, a row of blue lightsin the middle, and then a row of redlights on the bottom. It was observedfor perhaps 3-5 minutes — but gave theimpression of not being close by.

( REFERENCES1. APRO Bulletin, March, 1977.

2. UFO Pulse Analyzer, May, 1977; UFOQuebec, No. 9, . 1977: UFO ResearchersNewsletter, Winter 1976.

Photo 1. 23 April 1977.

Photo 2. Shape due to motion ofcamera.

3. Slave Lake (Alberta) Scope: March 16; March23; March 30; April 6; April 20; May 11, 1977.

4. Slave Lake (Alberta) Scope; April 6, 1977

5. UFO Pulse Analyzer, May, 1977.

6. RES Bureaux Bulletin, February 17, 1977.

7. UFO Quebec, No. 9, 1977.

8. RES Bureaux Bulletin, April 21, 1977.

9.RES Bureaux Bulletin, July 14, 1977.

10. UFO Quebec, No. 10, 1977.

11. UFO Pulse Analyzer, June, 197-7.

12. Canadian UFO Report, Spring, 1977; TrueF/ying Saucers & UFOs Quarterly, No. 6,Summer, 1977.

13. Saint John's Edmonton Report, May 2, 1977.

15

By Richard Hall

As of early December it has beenshown in Los Angeles, Chicago, andNew York, and is about to open inWashington, D.C., and elsewhere. "It"is "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"(CE-III), one of the most ballyhooedfilms of modern times. Its potentialinfluence on the U.S. Government wassuggested by David Williamson, aNASA assistant for special projectsinvolved with the proposed spaceagency study of UFOs, who has beenquoted as saying, "Close Encounters isgoing to kill us." He was alluding to theprobable effect that the film will have inadding pressure on NASA to dosomething about UFOs.

Despite that welcome prospect, earlyverbal reports from knowledgable UFOresearchers who have seen CE-III arenot encouraging with regard to itstreatment of factual UFO events.Contrary to the advance publicity, theysay, many liberties are taken with"facts," and the events depicted oftenare embellished beyond the knownfeatures of catalogued UFO reports.CE-III was not expected to be adocumentary, but it supposedly was tobe based closely on real happenings. Apoorly informed public may be lead tobelieve that the events they see on thescreen have really happened, andunfortunately that will further confusethe issue of what real, verified evidenceexists about UFOs.

Apparently CE-III comes closer tobeing another "docu-drama," and hasall the good and bad features of thatgenre. One of the bad features is theblurring of established truth or realityfor the sake of drama and/or to makesocial commentary. Knowledgableufologists are likely to be disappointedunless they consider it as aphilosophical or poetic statement aboutthe implications of encounteringextraterrestrials and about man's placein the scheme of things. Most reviewersto date have seen it that way, and most

16

6 DAYS LEFT.

have found it to be a warm, humanstory with strong religious or mysticalovertones.

Advance PublicityCE-III has had extraordinary

advance publicity. In the Washingtonarea alone it has had at least thefollowing mentions:

•Two-page ads in the WashingtonPost (also in major cities across theU.S.) in April

•Mention by reviewer Gary Arnoldin the Post (10/17) calling it a "UFOthriller"

•Article in the Post by Jack Egan(11/2) about stock marketspeculation in Columbia Picturesstock based on the film'santicipated earnings; Egan called itthe "hottest ticket" in New York

•Story in the Post (11/7) by TomZito describing a special screeningof CE-DI in New York for 2,500journalist from all over the world

•Story in the Post (11/8) by GaryArnold about the New York specialscreening: "There seemed to begeneral agreement that...(it is)destined to end up among the topmoneymakers of modern film -history. 'Close Encounters' is amore exciting and ingratiating setof variations on the mysticalscience-fiction theme introducedin'2001'"

•"Openings" notice in the Post"Weekend" magazine (12/9):"...extraordinary new science-fiction fantasy.. .suspenseful.. .afinale of dazzling pictorial beautyand transporting sentimentalappeal"

A "count-down" ad (see above) hasalso appeared in the Washington Post,and presumably other major cities.

Most reviewers, whether or not theyliked other aspects of the film, havesingled out the spectacular climax asbeing something extraordinary. Time

CLOSE ENCOUNTERSOf TH€ THffm KIND

DECEMBER AP IN WASHIMSTOW PcSf

(11/7) reviewed it at length. Thereviewer says, "...it reaches the viewerat a far more profound level than "StarWars" ...it uses science fiction thrills toseduce the audience into looking at thecosmos metaphysically...The moment(of climax) has a powerful, almostmystical, emotional charge..."

Newsweek (11/21) devoted a coverstory to it, with a detailed review andthree "sidebar" stories about Dr.Hynek, Director Steven Spielberg, andspecial effects wizard DouglasTrumbull. Reviewer Jack Kroll terms it"a genuine work of the popularimagination." As he sees it, "...it's notabout the paranormal, it's aboutpeople." In addition, it is "first andf o r e m o s t . . . a n e n t e r t a i n m e n tmovie...(a) popular SF (science fiction)romance..."

In New Yorker magazine (11/28), awell-known reviewer Pauline Kaelwaxed rhapsodic about this "beautiful,big, enjoyable film." She saw it as one ofthe most "innocent technologicalmarvel movies and one of the mostsatisfying." To her, the machines fromouter space were "defied," andrepresented a "beatific technology." Itwas a young man's film of "immensecharm" and "not a sour thought in it."Overall, she characterized it as "ascientific fairy tale...a transcendentallysweet movie." The spectacular climax,she says, is "one of the peerlessmoments in movie history."

(Continued on next page)

UFO Halts Van in South Africa(Translated from Die Water/and, June 23, 1977, by Cynthia Hind)

For the first time in the history ofUFQs in South Africa, a UFO hasbrought a vehicle to a standstill. Mr.Arthur Knott-Craig, editor of theKarroo News has confirmed to us thatlast week, one of the newspaper'sdelivery vans was compulsorily broughtto a standstill by a UFO.

UFOs have made people scatter inthe district of Graaf-Reniet, Hanoverand De Aar. This time, the UFOsappeared only at night. Whether it wasone or more, -no one can say.

(Continued from page 16)Equally, impressed was reviewer

Vern Perry in the Santa Ana, Calif.,Register (11/18). Perry termed it "...anunqualified, artistic success...nothingshort of one of the most awesomedisplays of cinematic ingenuity ever tocome out of Hollywood."

What It Means for UFOlogyAltogether, these advance noticessuggest that CE-ffl has not really donejustice to UFQs per se.Instead; it is a slick entertainmentpackage somewhere : between dpcu-drama and fantasy — a personal visionof the Director only piggybacking onreported UFO cases to allow him theraw material for a visual spectacularand — according to some — a vehiclefor social commentary. Spielberghimself has been, quoted as preferringto call it an "adventure thriller."

It would appear that whatever effectsthe film has on real-life UFOinvestigations, therefore, are likely tobe a result of stirring the popularimagination rather than convincinglyportraying real UFO events in afictional setting.

Additional reviews, comments, andimpressions of CE-FII will be included infuture issues of the Journal. V the filmsucceeds in waking people to theimport of possible contact .withextraterrestrials or "metaterrestrials"its influence on UFO investigationscould be profound.

In one instance, a UFO hoveredalongside the National Road, not farfrom Hanover. The UFO followed afarmer's car. The farmer later reached200km/h in an effort to lose the UFO,but it remained on his tail and its stronglights lit up the interior of the car.Another farmer had a similarexperience. But the incident in whichMr. At Gouws of Noupoort wasinvolved, was the highlight of all theexperiences.

It was 5:15 AM when Mr. Gouwswas on his way to Lootsberg, where hehad to meet Mr. Knott-Craig with all thenews from the North for Saturday'spaper. When Mr. Gouws reached Mr.Knott-Craig, he was shaking like a leafwith fright. He said that near the FarmEbenhaeser on the National Roadbetween Noupoort and Middelburg, hebecame aware of a dull glow at. theWolwekop. quarry. For a moment hethought it was the moon and did not payany further attention to it. Butsuddenly, the UFO, with itsphosphorescent-like glow, plummeteddown onto the newspaper's vehicle.The glow from the UFO enveloped thewhole vehicle. Although Mr. Gouws didnot stop, the,vehicle's engine cut outand the lights died. A moment later, theUFO left with a buzzing sound and thevehicle's engine and lights came on oftheir own accord.

Mr. Gouws says he can remembereverything as he tells it, but nothingfurther. He cannot recall whathappened while, he was in the vehicleand the UFO hung in front, next to andabove him, and gave off the glow. "I feltthat something happened, but cannotthink what," he said. "\ really had aterrible fright."

Immediately after the engine of hisvehicle started of its own accord, it diedagain. When he pressed the starter, theengine took hold again then proceedednormally.

Mr. Gouws handed in a reportabout his experience to the MiddelburgPolice.

I

I

1977MUFONSYMPOSIUMPROCEEDINGS

(166 pages)

UFOs: WHAT'S YOUR BALL GAME? by

Thomas M. Gates, Sunnyvale, CAIK. MUFON

Consultant In Astronomy

FURTHER EVIDENCE OF UFO RADIATION

BY James M. McCampbell, Belmont, Calif.,

MUFON Director of Research and Author of

UFOLOGY.

UFO INVESTIGATIONS by Bill Pitts, Fort

Smith,-Ark. MUFON State Director for

Arkansas •

WHY THE COVER-UP? by Richard Gottlieb,

Phoenix, Arizona Member of Ground Saucer

Watch (GSW, Inc.) Research Board

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF INVESTIGA-

TING UFOs by John L. Warren, Ph.D. Los

Alamos, New Mexico. MUFON Consultant

In Physics and State Director for New Mexico

FUTURE PHYSICS AND ANTI-GRAVITY by

William F. Hassel, Ph.D., Woodland Hills,

Calif., MUFON Consultant and State Section

Director

MODERN IMAGE PROCESSING REVISITS

THE GREAT FALLS, MONTANA AND

TREMONTON, UTAH MOVIES by William

H. Spauldlng, Phoenix, Ariz., Director of GSW,

Inc., MUFON State Director for Arizona and

.Photographic Consultant

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM HYPNOSIS

OF IMAGINARY ABDUCTEES? by Alvln

H. Lawson, Ph.D., Garden Grove, CAIK.

MUFON State Section Director for Orange

County

SCIENCE FICTION, SCIENCE, AND UFOs by

Stanton T. Friedman, Nuclear Physicist, UFO

Lecturer, and MUFON Consultant In Nuclear

Physics

Price: $5.00 Post Paid From:

MUFON

103OLDTOWNE ROAD

SEQUIN, TEXAS 78136 U.S.A.

17

Book Reviewby Dave Dobbs

SITUATION RED, .THE UFO SIEGEBy Leonard H. StringfieldDoubleday 7 Company, S8.95

"Either man is alone in the gal-axy, or he is not; either alternativeis mind-boggling." Lee DuBridge,the eminent physicist, has statedthe conundrum well.

In our .own corner of the galaxyrelatively close as astronomicaldistances go, astrophysicists con-servatively estimate that there areprobably .at least a million starswith planets supporting highly-evolved life forms. Others think thenumber might be ten times thishigh!

Astronomer Frank Drakeof Cornell University puts it, "Atthis very minute, with almost ab-solute certainty, radio waves sentforth by other intelligent civili-zations are falling on the earth.''• Evidently more than radio wavesmay be falling on the earth thesedays, according to Len Stringfield'snew book. "An Update on Strangeand Frequently FrighteningEncounters," as the book is sub-titled, describes it rather well. Youmay have noticed the announce-ment of the book in the SundayEnquirer for May 22, Len, as youmay know, is a Cincinnatian, aseasoned vetern of 27 years of UFOinvestigation with an internationalreputation for careful and unbiasedrepotting. He has invited C.R.A.members to assist in tracking andreporting local UFO incidents.

Len's approach to the subject isfar from sensationalistic, despitethe title of the book. He does,however, convey a sense of urgencyto our search for the truth about

UFO's; with good reason, you'llagree, when you've read this fas-cinating book. If you're curiousabout the nature of the "unsettlingdisclosures" about UFO's expectedto be released by the governmentlater this year according to U.S.News and World Report, you'llfind the answers here. Whetheryou are a seasoned saucer buff or -only mildly interested in UFO'sLen's book will serve you well.

The "foo fighters'' of World WarII serve to introduce a historicalpanorama which provides a back-ground for the current situation.Len's own UFO experience in 1945is detailed as well. As a member ofan Air Force Intelligence missionto Japan, a few days before theactual surrender, he saw threeUFO's pace their plane at closerange. Electromagnetic effects andloss of power almost necessitatedditching at sea. This antedatesby two years Ken Arnold's famous"flying saucers over Mount

. Rainier" which ushered in the earof popular interest in the phe-nomena.

From lights in the sky to landingsfrom close encounters to abductionsLen leads the reader through amaze of doumented cases, severalof which have not been publicizedbefore. Close encounters are oc-curring with increasing frequency,and in such numbers that the lidof secrecy simply can't be kept onany longer. "Situation Red" givesus a peek behind the scenes ofhistory in the making as govern-

ments around the world prepare totell their citizens the truth.

I was fooled by the size of Len'sbook. It doesn't look very thick and$8.95 is a lot of transistors, but it's'size is deceptive. :There's,a.lot:ofreading there, and a lot of finephotographs. To keep the costdown narrow margins were used,so in terms of material containedthe book is quite a bargain. It's oneyou'll be proud to have in yourlibrary, and may be in big demandby the end of the year. '

GROUND SAUCER WATCHSIXTH ANNUAL MEETING

Todd Zechel and Bill Spaulding willoffer substantiating documentation onthe intelligence community's secretUFO programs.

Date: January 13, 1978Time: 7:30 p.m.Place: Safari Hotel (Scottsdale, Ariz.)Price: $3.00 Adults

$2.00 Students

Reseve tickets from:GSW Inc., 13238 N. 7th,Phoenix, Arizona 85029

18

DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE

lib Brand von Ludwiger, Directorof MUFON/CES (Central EuropeanSection of the Mutual UFO Network)

^ has advised that they conducted their4th MUFON-CES meeting at the Hotel

-, Atlantic in Ottobrunn, near Munich inf West Germany on September 9th and

10th. Some of the speakers who' presented papers were Dr. L. Gerrera,

Dr. H. Th. Auerback, AdolphSchneider, Charles Huffer, E. Gerland,and lib Brand. Having published theirthree prior conference proceedings inGerman, they will soon publish the 1977MUFON—CES Proceedings in Englishonly. It will include the governmentalinquiry made in the United States byCharles Huffer, short conference

, reports and field investigation reportsof UFO cases in Langenargen/Bodensee and Jemgun/Ostfriesland(North Germany). At the conference,Charles Huffer gave an illustrated slidereport on the First International UFOCongress in Acapulco,.Mexico, and theEighth Annual MUFON UFOSymposium in Scottsdale, Arizona, onJuly 16 and 17.

Charles A. Huffer has agreed to, serve as the liaison representative of

MUFON to the MUFON/CES.Charles, a U.S. citizen, teaches

V mathematics at Berlin High School inBerlin, Germany. His mailing address isBerlin High School, APO, NY 09742.He considers Little Rock, Arkansas, ashis home in the United States. It hasbeen a distinct pleasure knowing andworking with Charles during the pasttwo years. He is a member of MENSA.

The international scope ofMUFON is very apparent when onenotes the number of UFO reportspublished in the Journal each month.

The May, 1977 issue carried articles byAugustin Moraru - Romania, JennyRandies-England, Ilkka Serra-Finland,and Mike Viljoen - South Africa. TheJune 1977 issue carried a pilot report inColumbia written by Don Berliner. TheJuly issue featured a UFO sightingreport by Milos Krmelj fromYugoslavia, "Encounter at Sea" inSpain by Maximiliano del Rosal astranslated by Ricardo Aguilar, "UFOsCollide Over Brazil" by OttoRaymundo, "UFOs Over theWaldviertel Highlands" by Ernst Berger- Austria, and "Little Balls and UFOs"by Jean Bastide - France. MUFON isnot only indebted to these fine peoplefor their international UFO sightingreports, but to Richard H. Hall,International Coordinator and to JoeBrill from Quincy, Illinois, formercoordinator for developing ourworldwide network.

While recognizing the contri-butions of MUFON's foreignrepresentatives, we would like to thankBryan M. Hartley, 23 Hastings Road,Thomton-le-Fylde, Lancashire, FY55JA, England, for sending us thecurrent issues of Northern UFO News,a mimeographed publication by theNorthern UFO Network in England,edited by Jenny Randies.

The ink had hardly dried on the1977 MUFON UFO SymposiumProceedings before we started planningfor our Ninth Annual MUFON UFOSymposium to be held July 29 and 30,1978, at the Dayton Convention Centerin Dayton, Ohio, with roomaccomodations at Stouffer's DaytonPlaza Hotel and Dayton DowntownHoliday Inn. Richard Hoffman isscheduled to be the master of

ceremonies.Speakers who have already

consented to speak are Major DonaldE. Keyhoe, Raymond Fowler, TedBloecher, and Richard H. Hall. Planyour vacations to not only attend thesymposium, but to visit the former siteof Project Blue Book at Wright-Patterson AFB.

It is with regret that we accept theresignation of Dennis W. Hauck asEditor of MUFON UFO Journal. Hehas been unable to devote his fullattention to this important contributionto UFOlogy during the past fewmonths. We still are not back onschedule with our current issues of theJournal. As a means of "catching up",Dennis will edit the August issue,Richard Hall the September issue, andWalt Andrus the October, 1977 issue,each working independently, butsimultaneously. In the meantime, a neweditor will be secured. Our best wishesare extended to Dennis in his futurepublishing endeavors.

MUFON103 OLDTOWNE RD.SEGUIN, TX 78155

19

Recapping and CommentingBy Richard Hall (MUFON International Coordinator) '

(Comments in this month's column arebased, in part, on articles appearing inthe May 197? issue, No. 114, circulatedin September).

UFO and the MediaThe deterioration of the

newsstand magazine Official UFO intoa sensationalistic fiction-monger is onlyone sign of a long-standing problem.The recent and pending UFO movies ~mostly fictionalized or so-called "docu-drama" ~ are another part of it. Theproblem is the exploitation of the UFOsubject by the popular media. Worsethan that, the cheapening of the subjectwhich prevents it being taken seriouslyat higher levels.

Recent personal experience withthese organizations has led me to thebitter conclusion that their efforts tendto be incompatible with, and oftengreatly harmful to, serious UFOresearch. Their presence is nothingnew, but their influence today perhapsis more insidious. In the 1960*s atNICAP I was approached by "men'smagazines," f l y - b y - n i g h t f i lmcompanies, and the National Enquirer,(whose trademark then was bloodyviolence and sex), all wanting to exploitUFOs. They had to be, and were,rebuffed.

Today the National Enquirer hascleaned up its image considerably.Although its reliability and accuracy insome areas still is subject toconsiderable doubt, certain of itsreporters are doing a good job withUFO news. Even so, the news ispresented within a fabric of insipid,romantic mush, tattle-tale gossip aboutstars, and advice on how to solve allyour problems.

Today MUFON and other groupsmaintain uneasy relationships with theNational Enquirer, flashy newsstandmagazines on UFOs (unheard of in the1960*s), and the film companies, alleager to exploit the popular interest inUFOs. As the only media groups payingattention to us, they stroke our egos,pay for our information, and flatter usby their attention. But what are theydoing to us in the long run? Are we notbeing prostituted? A shoddy version ofthe "truth" is being mass-marketedpurely to make money, furthermisleading an already poorly informedpublic.

Just as con men rush in to fill thevacuum left by scientists who take ahands-off attitude, so do the leastresponsible journalists seize on apopular subject when higher classmedia organizations turn up theirnoses. It should be no surprise in thesecircumstances that UFOs have theimage of being a pu f fed -up ,insubstantial subject propagated byopportunists.

I feel that we must seriouslyquestion the nature of any futurerelationships with those who contributeso greatly to the confusion andmisinformation about UFO. Perhapsmore effort should be given to acampaign of presenting carefullyinvestigated facts to high qualityjournalists, scientists, and otherswhose involvement could make adifference.

I Mark R. Herbstritt

tStronomyNotes

THE SKY FOR SEPTEMBER 1977

Mercury—On the 5th it is in infer-ior Conjunction, but by the 21st it isat greatest western elongation,standing about 17 degrees abovethe eastern horizon at sunrise.

Venus—It is visible in the east forabout three hours before sunrise. Itis less than half a degree south ofSaturn on the 18th and about thesame amount north of Regulus onthe 22nd.

Mars—In Gemini, it rises aboutfive hours after sunset and is ap-proaching the meridan at sunrise.

Jupiter—In Gemini, it rises beforemidnight and is nearing the mer-idian at sunrise.

Saturn—In Leo near Regulus, itis now a morning star rising oneor two hours before the sun.

The alpha Aurigid Meteor showeroccurs on the 22nd.